Summary of Fiscal Year 2016 National Defense Authorization Act

Summary of Fiscal Year 2016 National Defense Authorization Act
As Reported by House Armed Services Subcommittees

Timing
The full House Armed Services Committee will consider the bill and many amendments on April 29, with a marathon session likely to run well past midnight. The bill is then expected on the House floor the week of May 11

OVERALL TOTALS
$495.9 billion – Pentagon base budget
$  19.0 billion – Department of Energy base budget
$  89.2 billion – Overseas Contingency Operations fund
$    7.6 billion – Defense mandatory spending

$611.8 billion GRAND TOTAL

OVERSEAS CONTINGENCY OPERATIONS BUDGET: Authorizes a huge $38 billion expansion of the Overseas Contingency Operations account for base budget items such as operations and maintenance. The fund would now total $96 billion, including $89.2 billion for the Pentagon. The account was originally established to pay for conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan, but now functions as a catch-all slush fund to evade the budget caps self-imposed by Congress. To ensure that the Office and Management and Budget would not block budget tricks, the committee forces spending “without restriction, limitation, or constraint on the execution of such funds in support of base requirements.”

NUCLEAR WEAPONS AND MISSILE DEFENSE ISSUES

Special submarine fund: Expands the National Sea-Based Deterrence Fund, a special account to pay for the Navy’s new ballistic missile submarines that it cannot afford. Permits the Pentagon to tap unobligated funds from across the Defense Department and authorizes transferring $1.4 billion from research and development accounts. The fund was first established last year, but the appropriators have not yet added any money to carry out the concept. According to a 2014 Congressional Budget Office report, the new ballistic missile submarine program is expected to cost between $102 and $107 billion to research, develop, and procure. Undersecretary of Acquisitions Frank Kendall has expressed concern that this special fund is ineffective in making the program more affordable, as the Pentagon still needs to pay for the new system and “changing the accounting system doesn’t really change that fundamental requirement.”

New long-range bomber: Cuts $460 million from the request for a new long-range strategic bomber because of delays in awarding contracts and directs the comptroller general to review the service’s acquisition strategy for the Long Range Strike-Bomber (LRS-B) program. The Air Force has had great difficulty controlling costs of past bomber programs. The Air Force planned to build 132 B-2 nuclear bombers and ended up with only 21 because costs were spiraling out of control. An estimate for the total cost of the bomber program, excluding potential for cost-growth, is $90 billion, according to Todd Harrison of the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments.

Response to Russian INF violations: Requires the Pentagon to begin work on “counterforce capabilities to prevent intermediate-range ground-launched ballistic missile and cruise-missile attacks” that can be deployed in two years as a response to Russian violations of the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty. But the committee does not authorize flight testing of any new system, which would be a violation of the INF Treaty.  

East Coast Missile Defense: Provides $30 million for planning an East Coast missile defense site that is estimated to cost $3 billion or more. The Pentagon, which is in the process of conducting environmental impact studies of four potential sites in New York, Maine, Ohio and Michigan, has repeatedly said it doesn’t need and cannot afford a third anti-missile battery on American territory. Missile Defense Agency’s director, Vice Adm. James Syring, has testified that the agency places a higher priority on developing better tools to identify incoming missiles and address shortcomings in the existing Exoatmospheric Kill Vehicle rather than spend billions on a third site (in addition to sites in Alaska and California). “I would rather invest and develop the technologies that allow us to get on the correct side of the cost curve,” stated Adm. Bill Gortney, the head of the U.S. Northern Command.

Boost phase missile defense: Requires development of a boost phase Ground-based Midcourse Defense system. In 2012, the National Research Council of the National Academies, tasked with assessing the feasibility, practicality, and affordability of U.S. boost-phase missile defense, recommended that the United States end its pursuit.

Theatre missile sites in Central Europe:  Requires the modification of the Aegis Ashore site in Romania, and the planned site in Poland, to provide enhanced Anti-Air Warfare capability for defense against Russian aircraft and cruise missiles.

Moving missile defense radar: Requires the relocation of the Sea-based X-band Radar from Hawaii to a site on the East Coast by 2020, with the plan to homeport the radar on the East Coast. This system has been the focus of considerable ridicule. While effective at magnifying distant objects, the X-Band Radar has a field of vision too narrow to identify incoming missile threats and distinguish between live warheads and decoys.    

Non-proliferation funding: Continues a ban on Fiscal Year 2016 funding defense nuclear nonproliferation programs from being spent in Russia, although waivers are allowed if the Energy Department deems it in U.S. security interests.

Radiological portals: Cuts funding from fixed-site radiological portals designed to intercept nuclear weapons and nuclear materials from being shipped from other countries to the U.S. Rep. Cooper may try to restore the funds.

National Nuclear Security Administration:  Adds $150 million to address the infrastructure problems within the NNSA.

CONVENTIONAL WEAPONS

Retiring cruisers: Blocks the Navy from retiring Ticonderoga-class cruisers and requires the modernization of two of the cruisers to begin next year. Last year, the Navy tried to take half the cruisers out of service for modernization, but Congress refused the request.

Refueling carriers: Supports the nuclear refueling overhaul of the aircraft carrier George Washington, construction of the carriers John F. Kennedy (CVN 79) and Enterprise (CVN 80), and provides batch or incremental funding authority for CVN 81 and five more carrier refueling overhauls.

Littoral combat ships (LCS): Provides the full Navy request for littoral combat ships. The LCS is plagued with design and construction issues, and cost growth. In 2014, the program was restructured and the Navy plans to build the final 20 of 52 ships with a revised structure. The Navy plans to refer to these ships as frigates, not LCSs.

Aircraft added to the budget: Authorizes $1.2 billion for 12 more F/A-18E/F Super Hornets and $1 billion for six more F-35B Joint Strike Fighter jets than the Pentagon requested.

F-35 engine: Requires an independent review of the F135 engine for the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter.

A-10 Warthog: Adds $683 million to keep the A-10 flying.

OVERSEAS CONFLICTS AND TERRORISM

Aid to Ukraine:  Authorizes up to $200 million to provide the Ukrainian military with lethal defensive weapons.

Guantanamo Bay prisoners: Bars movement of detainees from Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, to the U.S. or their transfer or release to certain foreign countries, like those that sponsor terrorism. Also continues the ban on constructing new facilities for these prisoners in the U.S.

Counterterrorism Fund: Blocks $2.1 billion requested for a counterterrorism partnership fund.

Jordan: Authorizes $600 million to help Jordon’s border security and military capacity.

Syrian rebels: Authorizes $600 million to train and equip Syrian opposition forces.

Iraq: Authorizes $715 million to train and equip Iraqi forces in the fight against the Islamic State.

Iran: Includes nine non-binding, sense of Congress points denouncing Iran and questioning the international negotiations. While the language is not helpful to diplomacy, it does not block negotiations or prevent potential sanctions relief.

MISCELLANEOUS

Pentagon Acquisitions: Includes language to use recent prices paid as a benchmark for price reasonableness. This proposal will limit the government’s ability to compare pricing to commercial rates, and will not allow the government to get the best deal possible for goods or services. Just because the government has paid a certain amount for a certain good or service in the past does not mean it was, or will be, a reasonable price.

Navy and Marine Corps: Changes the name of the Department of the Navy to the Department of the Navy and Marine Corps.

Chain Reaction
Council for a Livable World is a Washington, D.C.-based non-profit,
non-partisan advocacy organization dedicated to reducing the danger of
nuclear weapons and increasing national security.

Follow Chain Reaction on Twitter